Woodstock Jag Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Is the 4 million to 1 million vote fact then or just a rumour that means 3 million votes weren't cast either way? I presume you mean 4 milion or so votes were not cast either way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm curious as to how you can have a truly secret ballot without weighting votes according to the number of shares owned or proxied by a particular person. Who counted the votes and who verified it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honved Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm curious as to how you can have a truly secret ballot without weighting votes according to the number of shares owned or proxied by a particular person. Who counted the votes and who verified it? Tom Hughes probably did both, so the figures will be 100% reliable (irony alert) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Tom Hughes probably did both, so the figures will be 100% reliable (irony alert) "The numbers are so big and my abacus only works in base 8" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted January 31, 2011 Members Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Will - I was not present at the meeting. The information I posted was simply obtained from Companies House. I expect that whoever was running the meeting would have required to announce the results of the vote since it does not appear to have been a unanimous decision. Perhaps someone who attended could confirm either way. Your numbers were pretty much what I've seen in the past and since it's so difficult to sell the shares again, I assumed the numbers would be pretty much the same. I hear from a couple of sources that was indeed the split which means that at least 3 million votes weren't cast and for me that's every bit as bad as a "no" vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Tom Hughes probably did both, so the figures will be 100% reliable (irony alert) Isn't he still some sort of notional Club guarantor for the Bank? And Gerber Landa and Gee still do the accounts AFAIK. Edited January 31, 2011 by Woodstock Jag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrantB Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I don't know about anyone else but I was considering taking the club up on any share issue that they were planning. Now, they can shove it up their ronson. I might have to take up Mr Beattie's offer to e mail him with some suggestions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavin1 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I would just like to thank Jim for his past work. I am pretty sure that there would be no "kids go free" or other fan orientated schemes without him. He was obviously a driving force in trying to make the matchday experience better for supporters - The rest of the board on the other hand don't seem to give two hoots about the fans! A question for you Jim if you are reading - Is this a petty minded vandetta or should we the supporters be worried about the intentions of the current Board & the future of our club? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Exile Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I don't know about anyone else but I was considering taking the club up on any share issue that they were planning. Now, they can shove it up their ronson. Hopefully Mr Alexander will re-appear on the forum at some point to give his side of what's happened, but for the moment this quote perfectly sums up my feelings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) The shroud of the dark side has fallen. A labyrinth of evil, this board has become. To vote JA off, is a clear signal that the cancerous influence of Hughes and others, as stated by Willjag earlier in thread, is still prevalent. As others have stated JA was central for almost everything good that's happened with PTFC in last couple of years - to stab him (and ultimately the supporters) in the back like this, stinks to high heaven. If those who are more interested in lining their own pockets, over the continued existence and possible betterment of the club, are allowed to remain in power (and retain their shares) much longer and carry out the several phases of their 'nice little retirement earner', then the club is as good as dead in 5 years. Fan-owned club? Not a chance by looks of it, as these evil dark knights will kill it rather than hand over control. Lies, lies and more damn lies we are fed, while systematically these arsecandles strip and bleed the club dry, fattening their own bank balances and massaging their pathetic ego's and existence, while slowly killing the club we as supporters all love. The last print from Companies House that I have to hand dates from December 2008. At that time, there were c. 9M issued "B" shares in circulation. The key shareholders were as follows (in no particular order): Eddie Prentice: 1m Tom Hughes (held by Arch Investments): 1m Ronnie Gilfillan: 1m Jags Trust: 1m Jim Oliver: 500k David Beattie: 500k Grant Bannerman: 420k Each of John, Jill, Thomas (this is not Brown) & Jean McMaster: 260k each Dorothy Springford: 500k Norman Springford: 500K Duncan Stewart: 500k Robert Smith (Lord Smith of Kelvin): 200k Allan Cowan: 50k Jim Alexander (held by Environmental Air Conditioning): 20k Clearly, not everyone will have voted, and I expect that the majority of the major shareholders listed above who did vote, will have done so by proxy. To whom those proxies were given and on what basis they were given, I don't know. Make of that what you will. If it was 4 million to 1 million, and the JT did vote for JA, then that means not one other of any of those mentioned in the circa 8 million shares voted for JA. That is a shocking statement of affairs. DB's next programme notes should contain no words. Just a big fat F-U-all V sign. At least then we know it would be sincere and come from his heart. Edited January 31, 2011 by yoda-jag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow Traveller Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 If, as has been suggested elsewhere, Jim Alexander was responsible for setting up an internal audit of the financial goings on within the club, and he then finds himself bumped off the board on the votes of former directors whose regime might be under scrutiny...how bad does that look? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrantB Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Hopefully Mr Alexander will re-appear on the forum at some point to give his side of what's happened, but for the moment this quote perfectly sums up my feelings. Sadly he'll probably be bound by a confidentiality agreement. I wonder if the truth will ever get out.... The shroud of the dark side has fallen. A labyrinth of evil, this board has become. To vote JA off, is a clear signal that the cancerous influence of Hughes and others, as stated by Willjag earlier in thread, is still prevalent. As others have stated JA was central for almost everything good that's happened with PTFC in last couple of years - to stab him (and ultimately the supporters) in the back like this, stinks to high heaven. If those who are more interested in lining their own pockets, over the continued existence and possible betterment of the club, are allowed to remain in power (and retain their shares) much longer and carry out the several phases of their 'nice little retirement earner', then the club is as good as dead in 5 years. Fan-owned club? Not a chance by looks of it, as these evil dark knights will kill it rather than hand over control. Lies, lies and more damn lies we are fed, while systematically these arsecandles strip and bleed the club dry, fattening their own bank balances and massaging their pathetic ego's and existence, while slowly killing the club we as supporters all love. If it was 4 million to 1 million, and the JT did vote for JA, then that means not one other of any of those mentioned in the circa 8 million shares voted for JA. That is a shocking state of affairs. DB's next programme notes should contain no words. Just a big fat F-U-all V sign. At least then we know it would be sincere and come from his heart. This. Particularly the bit in bold. Beattie can take a big flying to himself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.C.G. JAG Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 This is all quite sad. Personally, although I didn't agree with Jim on a few things I respected the time he took to debate with me on a number of issues through PMs - Jim is approachable and willing to discuss things, which is a rare quality at Firhill. It does feel like all the attempts to create a vibrant positive atmosphere on matchdays and reverse the trend of falling crowds was down to Jim and I feel a fair bit less confident about this new direction tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Hope he doesnt mind this being reposted here but this is a good read , I would challenge the club to answer this , to me a no response is an acceptance that the facts are correct Utterly disgusted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 If, as has been suggested elsewhere, Jim Alexander was responsible for setting up an internal audit of the financial goings on within the club, and he then finds himself bumped off the board on the votes of former directors whose regime might be under scrutiny...how bad does that look? That would be the penultimate piece in the jigsaw from all the other information I've heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Hope he doesnt mind this being reposted here but this is a good read , I would challenge the club to answer this , to me a no response is an acceptance that the facts are correct Utterly disgusted Is that not just a watered down version of this thread? If anything I would be reading DU's post above! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Third Lanark Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I would just like to thank Jim for his past work. I am pretty sure that there would be no "kids go free" or other fan orientated schemes without him. He was obviously a driving force in trying to make the matchday experience better for supporters - The rest of the board on the other hand don't seem to give two hoots about the fans! A question for you Jim if you are reading - Is this a petty minded vandetta or should we the supporters be worried about the intentions of the current Board & the future of our club? Agree with you Gavin, not everyone woud agree with all that Jim Alexander did, but the guy put his heart and soul into doing his best for Partick Thistle. Thank you for all your hard work Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erty13 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Looks like the board have picked up a few tips on how to run an organisation from the Jags trust board Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Col Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I might have to take up Mr Beattie's offer to e mail him with some suggestions. I wouldn't bother Grant - I have sent him the same e-mail twice now with suggestions and not had the courtesy of a reply and I know of at least 3 others who are in the same boat. Even if he thought my suggestions were rubbish, an e-mail acknowledging their receipt would be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennythistle Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I wouldn't bother Grant - I have sent him the same e-mail twice now with suggestions and not had the courtesy of a reply and I know of at least 3 others who are in the same boat. Even if he thought my suggestions were rubbish, an e-mail acknowledging their receipt would be nice. Sad to hear that big col. I've found David Beattie to be very approachable in any dealings i've had with him. Was also David who put me in contact with Jim alexander over the proposed Bobby Law day. Seems on the evidence of this thread, the feel good factor felt by those of us who were at the meeting last week has gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 What exactly is going on here, what is the plan for the club........ it doesnt seem football is high up on the agenda. They have got rid of a guy who has brought more good ideas to the club listened to more fans and been more visible around the club than any other director, and it seems may have put more money in than some of the other directors. Did he get close to unearthing their master plan for the asset stripping of firhill. This whole propco thing stinks adding to that the fact that hughes etc seem to still be calling the shots and we have serious problems. Things seem to be afoot at firhill and not in a good way. Jim thanks for all the efforts you put in, you won't be forgotten Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaf Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Jim tried to make things better. Thank you. Just one correction to what has gone before. Clearly the ex-director is not an ex-director, he is a shadow director. And never has a phrase been more appropriate, lurking in the half-light. Shadow, half-light, shady deals, despite repeated failure in his area of responsibility - I could list them but they are all well known. Some people need to take long hard looks at themselves and hang their heads in shame. Well done to the Trust for having some backbone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milhouse Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Well if the Jags trust want to be billy big-time and run the show they'll just have to get lots of money to buy all the shares won't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 (edited) This whole shambolic episode smells of sh*te. I think it's time the remaining Directors came clean about PropCo, the influence of ex-Directors and what plans they have to involve fans in the running of the Club. When Double Ugly, Willjag, Honved and others become extremely concerned, it's serious stuff. Now more than ever could be the time for action. I am worried about one thing.... We had been made aware on Friday night by Tom Hughes that Jim was facing the posibility of being voted out based on the proxies he had recieved up until that point. Also looks like the rest of the PTFC BOD voted against him as well. Why was TH communicating with the Trust about likely vote patterns before the actual vote. Did the Trust not smell a rat on Friday ? Donald, perhaps you can tell us more about the nature of the TH conversations... I'd hate to think the JT was just a pawn in a wider game of subterfuge and deceit. Edited February 1, 2011 by sandy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow Traveller Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Now more than ever could be the time for action. But it won't happen, Sandy, so not much point getting worked up. I'd hate to think the JT was just a pawn in a wider game of subterfuge and deceit. Wasn't that the whole point of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.